Coalition and Malva. Prospects for self-propelled howitzers on wheeled chassis

108

Tracked self-propelled guns 2S35 and 2S19 on Red Square. Photo by AP RF

Currently, the Russian army is armed with a number of self-propelled artillery units with howitzer weapons, made on a tracked chassis. In the foreseeable future, it is planned to adopt two howitzer self-propelled guns on a wheelbase at once. Such a technique, having characteristic advantages, will be able to successfully complement the existing tracked self-propelled guns.

Tracks or wheels


Currently, the self-propelled artillery of the Russian army, with rare exceptions, is represented by armored vehicles on tracked chassis. For example, it is on the tracks that all 152-mm systems move - 2S3 Akatsiya, 2S5 Hyacinth-S and 2S19 Msta-S. The promising ACS 2S35 "Coalition-SV" is also made on a redesigned tank chassis.



As you know, the tracked chassis is characterized by high maneuverability and mobility on difficult terrain. In addition, when developing it, it is easier to provide the necessary safety margin corresponding to the mass of the artillery system and the power of its recoil. At the same time, the wheeled chassis is easier to manufacture and operate, and also exhibits better road performance.

In the recent past, it was decided to develop domestic howitzer artillery using both chassis options. It was planned to create a number of new samples with varying degrees of unification, adapted to work in different conditions. With their help, it would be possible to increase the flexibility of the deployment and use of ground artillery. The leading role in the development of new samples was given to the Nizhny Novgorod Central Research Institute "Burevestnik".


An unusual parking lot in Nizhny Novgorod is one of the first known images of the ACS 2S35-1, 2015-16. Photo Bastion-karpenko.ru

The first to appear was the 2S35-1 self-propelled gun project "Coalition-SV-KSH", made using the units of the original 2S35 self-propelled gun. Development work "Sketch" was also carried out, during which several self-propelled guns with different weapons were created at once. Howitzer artillery in this ROC was represented by the product 2S43 "Malva".

Wheeled "Coalition"


In parallel with the ACS 2S35, a unified project 2S35-1 was developed on a tracked base. It provided for the installation of a ready-made uninhabited fighting compartment on a four-axle KamAZ-6560 automobile chassis. Before being turned into a carrier of a weapon, the vehicle underwent a revision aimed at increasing the carrying capacity and strength. The armament turret was also redesigned for installation on a new base. At the same time, the 152-mm 2A88 gun and automatic loader remained the same.

The prototype "Coalition-SV-KSh" was built in 2015, and at the same time its tests began. In the future, various reports were regularly received about the successful continuation of work and about plans for the adoption of a new ACS into service. The exact shape of the new combat vehicle also became known. Her images were published in the parking lot and in a combat position.


"Coalition-SV-KSH" at the training ground. Photo Russianarms.ru

Recent ones news about the 2S35-1 project appeared a little over a year ago, in May 2020. It was reported that by that time a small series of new self-propelled guns had been manufactured. It was planned to complete the entire set of tests by the end of the year, after which the customer had to make his decision. It is not known whether all these plans were fulfilled. News about the adoption of the "Coalition-SV-KSH" into service has not yet been received.

Earlier, at the testing stage, representatives of the army revealed their intention to bring the 2S35-1 to service in the army. They were not going to give up such a project. It is very likely that the issue of adoption for service is being resolved right now, and the industry is preparing a full-fledged mass production. However, the details of such plans and activities were not disclosed.

Howitzer "Malva"


Several years ago, the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" began the ROC "Sketch", the purpose of which was to create a number of samples of self-propelled artillery, incl. howitzers on a wheeled chassis with the code "Malva". This project provides for the use of a four-axle chassis BAZ-6010-027, on which an artillery unit with a long-barreled 152-mm howitzer is openly mounted. Ammunition boxes are provided next to the breech of the gun; loading is done manually.


ACS "Malva" in the stowed position. Photo of the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik"

The prototype "Malva" was made last year, and soon it was shown at the "Army-2020". On May 9, the combat vehicle took part in the parade in Nizhny Novgorod. In early June, another shooting took place, which was attended by high-ranking representatives of the Ministry of Defense. In the relevant media reports, the public was able to see the 2C43 product in action for the first time.

It is reported that the tests of the ACS "Malva" are nearing completion, and the customer is showing some optimism. During a recent visit to the training ground, Deputy Defense Minister Alexei Krivoruchko noted that such equipment meets the requirements and is expected in the troops.

As Izvestia writes with reference to sources in the Ministry of Defense, the new 2S43 self-propelled guns will enter service with the newly formed artillery brigades as part of the ground and airborne troops. The issue of creating such formations in the Airborne Forces has already been resolved. Plans in the context of the ground forces are still being worked out. They will be accepted only after completion of work on "Malva".

Development prospects


The prospects for wheeled self-propelled guns in our army as a whole are obvious. The Ministry of Defense has made a fundamental decision: such samples will be developed and put into service. Right now, work is underway on several similar samples in different classes. Two 152-mm howitzer self-propelled guns, a pair of 120-mm self-propelled guns and an 82-mm mortar based on the armored car are undergoing tests. All of them have great chances to enter service, and we are mainly talking only about the timing of their appearance in the army.


Experienced self-propelled gun on the May 9 parade. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

With the help of promising 2S35 and 2S35-1 self-propelled guns on different chassis, it is planned to begin rearming the divisional artillery of the ground forces. With their help, it will become more flexible and efficient. The increase in all indicators will be obtained both due to a unified fighting compartment with a new weapons, and with the help of two fundamentally different chassis. At the same time, the ground forces will not yet abandon the Msta-S / SM self-propelled guns and other similar equipment.

ACS 2S43 "Malva" also has a chance to get into the army. In terms of the combination of combat and other characteristics, it can be considered as a modern and more mobile alternative to the existing 2S5 "Hyacinth-S" vehicle. Their joint and alternate application will allow obtaining the same results as in the case of the two variants of the "Coalition-SV".

Plans for the deployment of 2S43 products in the Airborne Forces are of great interest. At the moment, these troops do not have their own self-propelled artillery in 152 mm caliber, and the appearance of the Malva will understandably increase their combat potential. At the same time, the new wheeled self-propelled gun fits into the limitations of the military transport aviation and can be dropped by landing method. It should also be borne in mind that within the framework of new projects for the Airborne Forces, not only 2S43 is being developed, but also other samples with different characteristics and capabilities.


Shot "Malva". Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Waiting for a result


It should be noted that all the desired results can be obtained only in the medium or long term. At the moment, two 152-mm self-propelled howitzers are at the testing stage, and the timing of their entry into service has not yet been officially announced. However, the Ministry of Defense and industry are already making plans for the production and supply of equipment to the troops.

Apparently, it won't be long to wait. The main part of the remaining work on the "Coalition-SV-KSH" was planned to be completed by the end of last year. At the same time, they were previously going to perform the entire test cycle of the tracked 2S35. It is not known whether these plans were fulfilled. Development of "Malva" started later than "Coalition" and came to testing only last year. Accordingly, news about the adoption of the 2S35 / 2S35-1 may arrive in the near future, and messages about the 2S43 will have to wait until 2022-23.

But on the whole, the current situation is conducive to optimism. The Ministry of Defense made a fundamental decision to strengthen ground artillery with wheeled combat vehicles, and the industry has developed such equipment and is already preparing for its serial production. This means that in the coming years, the army will receive new equipment, and with it a whole range of new capabilities.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

108 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +14
    17 June 2021 03: 56
    A howitzer on a wheeled chassis is definitely needed.
    But whether "Malva" is needed - there are doubts ...
    It is clearly overweight - 32t with ammunition. Even the Soviet Msta-K, work on which was stopped in 87, was also one and a half tons lighter.
    Shedsky "Archer", with the same weight - has a full automatic!
    Czech "Dana / Susana" - 29,25t (also, by the way, 8x8)
    French CAESAR - 17,7t
    Israeli ATMOS - 22t
    1. +1
      17 June 2021 05: 16
      Quote: Ryabov Kirill
      .... the new wheeled self-propelled gun fits into the restrictions of military transport aviation and can be parachuted by landing method.

      strengthening the Airborne Forces of self-propelled artillery in caliber 152 mm will definitely expand the possibilities of application not only in regional conflicts.
      1. +9
        17 June 2021 07: 07
        What else? How many BTA sorties will be required to transfer one battalion of such weapons? Yes, with such an outfit of aircraft, you can transfer an airborne regiment. And parachute.
        Unfortunately, our Airborne Forces are now turning into parachute jumping (for tradition's sake) customary infantry with tanks and heavy artillery. Thus, losing mobility and losing the ability to perform part of the tasks assigned to the Airborne Forces.
        1. +3
          17 June 2021 10: 02
          Here we should recall the recent history, when the Airborne Forces sometimes found themselves completely without the support of artillery. Sometimes there was not enough range, sometimes there were difficulties in interaction with other parts of the ground forces. Own wheeled self-propelled guns of large caliber with a long range will not be superfluous for them.
          1. +2
            17 June 2021 10: 20
            Give specific examples when this Airborne Forces units were leaving without fire support?
            1. -2
              17 June 2021 10: 30
              The battle at the height of 776, the 6th company of the Pskov paratroopers, did you not hear?
              1. +5
                17 June 2021 11: 36
                At the height of 776, there was support by artillery, but there were no high-precision ammunition and there were no aerial reconnaissance equipment that would reveal the enemy's positions.
                And the enemy was also not and tried to shorten the distance of the battle as quickly as possible.
                1. -1
                  17 June 2021 11: 41
                  Oh really? And what were the targets for high-precision ammunition, more often in the forest?
                  Frankly, you surprised me indescribably, you are probably the first who challenged the lack of artillery support. There was not enough range for the NONA self-propelled mortars. Before you, there were only conspiracy theorists who claimed that there was a lot of artillery, but for unknown reasons they did not use it.
                  1. +3
                    17 June 2021 13: 31
                    What the greatest incompetence on your part.
                    How could Evtyukhin call artillery fire on himself if this fire was not there ?! request fool
                    You would not read conspiracy theorists, but inquired about the details of the battle.
                    1. +1
                      17 June 2021 14: 02
                      It is for you to familiarize yourself with where the fire was coming from, and why mines got to the position of the company, but not to the enemy. This is especially important for those in a tank or on an armored train.
                      1. +2
                        17 June 2021 14: 34
                        There, just the main problem was that the enemy was almost point blank from ours. Conversely, there was the danger of hitting their own. Evtyukhin adjusted artillery fire throughout the battle and, surrounded by spirits, summoned fire on himself.
                      2. 0
                        27 August 2021 10: 34
                        There is a completely different version. The problem was that Nona did not have enough range, or rather the steepness of the trajectory, to reach the enemy positions without clinging to the crowns of trees.
                      3. 0
                        27 August 2021 11: 27
                        There are reports from the commission, where it is clearly indicated that the terrain on the approach to the height is all pitted with craters, almost all trees have been felled and excised by shell explosions. Well, what is the rupture of shells and mines in the crown twice experienced on my own skin. Believe me - it's like remote detonation of ammunition on the trajectory. Covers on top. And then how lucky ... neither a hollow nor a trench can save you.
                        Well, it's strange to hear about the steepness of Nona's trajectory, which also shoots with a mortar. But the mountains have their own peculiarities, of course.
                  2. -1
                    27 August 2021 09: 07
                    Well, yes, but if a self-propelled gun were parachuted in the mountains, it would be a completely different matter. Stop using drugs.
              2. +3
                17 June 2021 13: 27
                The battle at the height of 776, the 6th company of the Pskov paratroopers, did you not hear?

                Let it be known to you that the 6th company had an artillery support.
                Regimental 120-mm guns 2S9 "worked" at height 776 almost continuously from noon on February 29 to the morning of March 1 (when Lieutenant Colonel Evtyukhin called fire on himself), firing about 1200 shells during this time. Moreover, most of the losses of the militants in this battle were caused precisely by the shelling.
                1. 0
                  17 June 2021 13: 35
                  Take a closer look, the version set out in popular literature is somewhat different from reality. There are sources who conducted a detailed analysis of the then situation. The range of self-propelled mortars was not enough to reach the positions of the militants. Simultaneously with the 6th company, two more similar strong points were organized, if my memory serves me, so they had artillery support in full and there the enemy failed to advance.
                  I also came across a review from a personnel artilleryman with an analysis of photographs from the site.
                  And according to literary descriptions, it turns out that 2000 120-mm mines were fired, but the militants still passed. How is this possible? Where were they released and when? Then a lunar landscape would be observed around the height. Have you seen him, at least in the photo?
                  1. +6
                    17 June 2021 14: 39
                    I studied this fight not from popular literature, but from documents. In the classroom at the Department of Tactics of the Combined Arms Academy. With all the details of the organization of the battle, taking into account the terrain conditions, the capabilities of the sides, the errors of the command of all levels and a detailed analysis of the actions of the defenders themselves.
                    If you are interested, I can share in a personal. I have all the abstracts.
                    1. -2
                      17 June 2021 14: 46
                      I read a detailed analysis of the actions of mortar artillery, they concluded that mines were exploding over the positions of the company, clinging to the crowns of trees at a height and did not reach the positions of the militants. Unprotected enemy manpower could not advance under the influence of artillery fire, which means it was not there, or it was very inaccurate or extremely limited.
                  2. +5
                    17 June 2021 15: 06
                    The meaning of the conversation is not about where the militants have gone. And the fact that the paratroopers at the height of 776 had artillery support of the regimental division 2S9. And you cited this fight as an example of its absence.
                    Moreover, you yourself admitted that it was, albeit, in your opinion, "ineffective."
                    The conversation has no further meaning.
                    1. 0
                      17 June 2021 15: 12
                      On that we will heat the srosten sad
    2. +2
      17 June 2021 06: 56
      NATO is developing the theme of "Lungs" 155mm art systems. Maybe this is the problem?
    3. -2
      17 June 2021 09: 59
      but what does the mass have to do with it? fits into the dimensions, but the rest is not important, she does not participate in races ... it is about the firing range / accuracy and cost
      1. +3
        17 June 2021 10: 24
        Weight matters when the aircraft is carrying capacity. Yes, and it is necessary to transport not only the howitzer, but also the ammunition for it. And it consists of two parts, transported with a gun and in a transport. Yes, and the calculation must be transported.
        So weight matters, especially for the Airborne Forces, where they want to put it into service for now.
        1. +3
          17 June 2021 13: 10
          laughing Well, let's start with the fact that in any case, only one car will fit into the IL, and taking into account the carrying capacity, there will be enough space on the BC ... First of all, you need to look not at the mass, but at the performance characteristics and the price
          1. +1
            17 June 2021 13: 22
            The question is how much more than one gun mount will fit into the plane.
            For air transport equipment, not only a ton, but even 10kg matters. And the carrying capacity depends on the flight range. Less fuel, more cargo.
            1. -1
              17 June 2021 14: 58
              laughing then take the towed weapon if the checkers are the main thing for you
          2. 0
            19 June 2021 23: 08
            Apparently, the question is broader. Maybe it's not worth chasing a large caliber for the Airborne Forces and making, say, a 122-130mm self-propelled gun on a three-axle chassis, about 20 tons, and then two vehicles will enter the 76th.
            1. 0
              20 June 2021 18: 40
              what's the point in the caliber 122 mm?
              1. 0
                20 June 2021 20: 36
                As a more powerful weapon for purposes inaccessible, for example, for Nona (Vienna), but in similar mass and dimensions ...
                1. 0
                  20 June 2021 21: 34
                  this is not an option..15,5 km range..it makes no sense
                  1. 0
                    21 June 2021 21: 17
                    So this is with Carnation, she is half a century already, military science does not stand still, ARS is developing, you can count on a range of 25+
                    1. 0
                      22 June 2021 20: 07
                      winked examples tell me?
                      1. 0
                        23 June 2021 22: 31
                        I'm talking about the prospects, because a new aircraft is being developed for the Airborne Forces. Why do it with old ammunition? Although, of course, she should also be able to shoot when she is old.
                        There is information on the network that the D-30 can throw the ARS for 22 km, but I have not yet found the nomenclature of this projectile for the truth, I can not vouch. However, this APC is an 80s development.
                      2. 0
                        24 June 2021 16: 28
                        this is not a prospect, this is your IMHO. About "there is something in the network that you can throw at 22 km" .. and Malva, according to current data, can throw ARSs at 24,5 km, and with a bottom generator at 29 km, and an important point, Pro which is still silent, replace the gun on Malva and install a similar one from the Coalition-Delov for 1 year of work ... and then you can work at 60-70 km ...
                      3. 0
                        25 June 2021 08: 52
                        I do not deny that all these are just my thoughts aloud.
                        I see no reason to compare 152 and 122 in terms of power and range, of course 152 will send the projectile further and "the boom will be steeper." But initially, my comment was about the difference in weight, dimensions and transportability. In the Ministry of Defense and the General Staff there are not stupid people, and if they decided that the Airborne Forces needed 152, then so be it. And if they still think whether the landing force needs such a powerful heavy system, then perhaps we will see alternative options in smaller caliber.
                      4. -1
                        25 June 2021 10: 09
                        taking into account the fact that they either have to fight against bandit formations, then the main thing is that the artillery is either with a modern army, then on the contrary, it is desirable to have long-range systems ... that 152 mm is the best choice
    4. +3
      17 June 2021 13: 35
      Don't kick for the truth. Apparently I do not rummage in the artillery at all.
      artillery unit with a long-barreled 152-mm howitzer.
      ... What is it like? Even on the SU152, a howitzer-gun was installed, here the barrel is clearly much longer. Where is the line between a howitzer and a cannon? In the elevation angle?
      1. +2
        17 June 2021 15: 13
        The cannon shoots a flat trajectory, the howitzer is more hinged, but it can also fire with direct fire. The second difference is that the cannon has a higher ballistics, while the howitzer has a lower one. Although modern long-barreled howitzers have all the properties of a cannon. And in fact they are cannon howitzers.
      2. +3
        17 June 2021 21: 01
        if I am not mistaken, then the propelling charges can be changed for the howitzer, but for the cannons there is no such
    5. 0
      18 June 2021 01: 53
      Shedsky "Archer", with the same weight - has a full automatic!
      I agree that we need a gun, these are modern requirements.
    6. 0
      20 June 2021 12: 27
      Zuzana and Zuzana 2 is not a Czech but a Slovak kolesnaya self-propelled gun.
      Dana yes, cheskaya.
  2. -1
    17 June 2021 06: 20
    I don't think that a wheeled self-propelled gun is needed for the army, because the experience of the Second World War has shown that wheeled vehicles, even four-wheel drive vehicles, are not capable of moving off-road. For example, the KSP-76 was not accepted into service precisely because it was considered impossible to use it off-road. And that is why we first stopped at OSU-76, which later became the airborne ASU-76, and then after installing a 57-mm cannon on it, which became ASU-57. Also, a wheeled SPG does not have a self-entrenching function, which is one of the most important functions for SPGs with light armor and with the development of modern drones. Wheeled SPGs are good for peacetime as they are cheaper to operate than tracked SPGs. But in a real combat situation, they are of little use.
    1. +2
      17 June 2021 06: 59
      152 and 155mm howitzers now reach a decent range and a large range of corp shells. Maybe this is the reason for the spread?
    2. +2
      17 June 2021 07: 04
      Why is the experience of the Second World War here? Over the past decades, everything has changed globally. From the number of roads to the equipment itself. The use of wheeled vehicles has huge advantages. From mobility to resource.
      1. +3
        17 June 2021 09: 19
        Moreover, it will replace towed samples ... and they are already wheeled.
        1. -2
          17 June 2021 09: 31
          Quote: Zaurbek
          Moreover, it will replace towed samples ... and they are already wheeled.

          In my opinion, towed artillery is better than wheeled self-propelled guns. The truck and the weapon are much cheaper than the wheeled SPG. Plus, the truck can be used for different needs in the army. A wheeled self-propelled gun carries only itself. In my opinion, the optimal ACS is a tracked one with 30 mm armor to protect the crew from heavy shrapnel and from aerial bombardment with aircraft cannons.
          1. +1
            17 June 2021 09: 53
            One option - Howitzer MSTA and Mustang8x8 ..... the second dava mustang. Savings on folding and deploying, moving ... loading there is not completely manual. Etc. And you can install it on a 8x8 truck and an armored personnel carrier of the Kurganets25 type ... the question is in the price, resource ... The Germans put their Pz on a traditional tracked chassis, an all-terrain vehicle with a cabin on tracks and an armored personnel carrier Boxer ...
          2. +5
            17 June 2021 11: 45
            The key moment for modern artillery is the time of occupying and leaving the position. The Armenians in Karabakh dug well, only these trenches and dugouts became their mass graves.
            Modern war requires you to quickly enter a position, quickly turn around, aim and deliver a fleeting, but at the same time massive blow, and then leave the position as quickly as possible in order to get out of the counterstrike of enemy artillery.
            Towed artillery is significantly inferior to self-propelled artillery in terms of the time it takes to occupy a position and the time it leaves it.
            1. +1
              17 June 2021 15: 21
              Quote: Cympak
              The Armenians in Karabakh dug well, only these trenches and dugouts became their mass graves.

              Firstly, they didn't dig in well, they stood like a louse in the palm of their hand. Secondly, they did not have any air defense systems, and the Azerbaijani air defense systems flew with impunity. It's like the beginning of the Second World War, when the Red Army did not have air defense, and the German vultures flew with impunity. The effect was about the same. Judging by your logic, modern artillery does not need to dig in wassat
              1. +1
                17 June 2021 18: 13
                Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                Firstly, they didn't dig in well, they stood like a louse in the palm of their hand. Secondly, they did not have any air defense systems, and the Azerbaijani air defense systems flew with impunity.

                Even if the UAVs will not be able to fly, the AIR has not been canceled. EMNIP, an adversary in the 80s considered it permissible for a battery to fire no more than three volleys before changing positions.
          3. +3
            17 June 2021 13: 05
            You do not take into account the caliber and weight of the projectile, as well as the weight of the weapon itself. The wheeled self-propelled gun still has a certain level of charging automation, and the towed version, in addition to the longer deployment time, also involves completely manual loading. If the version with a towed howitzer in the 122 mm caliber can be compared, then with 152 mm it is no longer. Can you imagine the work of the crew when deploying and firing from a 7-ton MSTA-B howitzer?
            1. -1
              17 June 2021 15: 30
              Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
              You do not take into account the caliber and weight of the projectile, as well as the weight of the weapon itself. The wheeled self-propelled gun still has a certain level of charging automation, and the towed version, in addition to the longer deployment time, also involves completely manual loading. If the version with a towed howitzer in the 122 mm caliber can be compared, then with 152 mm it is no longer. Can you imagine the work of the crew when deploying and firing from a 7-ton MSTA-B howitzer?

              Well, yes, an advantage. But if you have already decided to splurge on an SPG, then it is better to go all the way and splurge on a tracked SPG with light armor than to settle for a half-hearted solution with a wheeled SPG, which has no off-road maneuverability.
              1. +3
                17 June 2021 17: 18
                It has already been written many times about some of the advantages of wheeled chassis, as well as about their disadvantages. The advantages include less noise, which means more secrecy, not the last factor in military affairs. In the presence of roads, this is a greater speed of movement and a significantly greater motor resource, which is important in low-intensity conflicts, as well as keeping the asphalt pavement intact. Also, a longer service life is important when transferring on its own to save time for loading during transportation by rail. Not the last factor is fuel economy, purely estimated, with the same mass of tracks, due to increased friction, they will consume 20-30 percent more fuel.
                1. +1
                  19 August 2021 09: 25
                  >> keeping the asphalt pavement intact
                  An excellent argument, yes :) Take care of the asphalt.

                  Asphalt can be shifted in a day if necessary, but in the forests and swamps, which are 90% of the country - this asphalt is not.
                  And therefore caterpillars are needed.

                  Unless, of course, we do not count on a war only on the territory of Europe :) Then yes, we need to build wheeled vehicles :)
      2. -1
        17 June 2021 09: 34
        Quote: carstorm 11
        Why is the experience of the Second World War here? Over the past decades, everything has changed globally. From the number of roads to the equipment itself

        ICE technology, guns and weapons have not fundamentally changed since WWII. And there are not many roads in Russia.
        Quote: carstorm 11
        The use of wheeled vehicles has huge advantages. From mobility to resource.

        He will not be able to drive off roads on virgin soil, and attachment to roads for military equipment is a huge minus. And a resource for military equipment is not particularly needed, equipment does not last long in a war.
        1. 0
          17 June 2021 09: 42
          About the road is even funny but not the point. The resource of tracked vehicles is extremely limited. For a transfer of 500 km, the wheel will leave instantly. For a caterpillar, you drive it either on trawls or on platforms. Or you just march on it. The deployment time, again, calculate how different it is. The mobility of wheeled vehicles gives it a lot of advantages. It is economically more profitable at times. No resource needed ??? Are you normal? The designers have been fighting for the resource for decades.
          1. 0
            17 June 2021 10: 27
            Quote: carstorm 11
            The resource of tracked vehicles is extremely limited. For a transfer of 500 km, the wheel will leave instantly. For a caterpillar, you drive it either on trawls or on platforms. Or you just march on it.

            In general, for T-72 tanks, the resource between capitals is 5000 km, that is, the tank will withstand a march of 500 km. Even the T-34 tanks in 1944-1945 had a service life of 150 guaranteed hours and withstood multi-hundred-kilometer marches during offensives. 150 hours at an average speed of 15 km / h is 2250 km - more than a solid mileage!
            Quote: carstorm 11
            The deployment time, again, calculate how different

            And how does the deployment time of a wheeled ACS differ from the deployment time of a tracked ACS? Don't you confuse it with booked guns?
            Quote: carstorm 11
            The mobility of wheeled vehicles gives it a lot of advantages. It is economically more profitable at times. No resource needed ??? Are you normal? The designers have been fighting for the resource for decades.

            Mobility only when driving on the road. And what about the resource ... The resource for tracked vehicles was completed with the beginning of the use of Hadfield steel and quenching of the fingers with high-frequency currents, and the resource of the tracks became not tens of kilometers as in the 20s, but thousands of km by the end of the 30s, which made it possible abandon wheeled-tracked tanks and make the tanks tracked, capable of driving thousands of kilometers without repair.
            1. 0
              17 June 2021 13: 10
              We are not talking about abandoning tracked vehicles. Most likely the ratio will be 10: 1 in her favor.
        2. +1
          17 June 2021 11: 48
          Since the Second World War, the range, accuracy of artillery and reconnaissance equipment have fundamentally changed.
          Experience shows that both tracked and wheeled vehicles are needed. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. And something works well near Ryazan, and something near Homs.
          1. -1
            17 June 2021 13: 11
            Quote: Cympak
            Experience shows that both tracked and wheeled vehicles are needed.

            I would prioritize tracked vehicles for the Army, and wheeled vehicles for the National Guard.
            1. +4
              17 June 2021 13: 50
              Immediately I imagined 152 mm howitzers in service with the Russian Guard! laughing And the multiple launch rocket systems will not interfere with them? wassat
              1. +1
                17 June 2021 14: 33
                At the moment, in addition to armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles and various types of Mrapov, Rosgvardia is armed with:
                D-30 -------- 122 mm howitzer 20 [17] pcs
                PM-38 ----- 120 mm mortar 15 [17] pcs
                2B11 ------- 120-mm mortar n / a [18]
                ZU-23-2 ---- 23-mm anti-aircraft artillery mount n / a [18]
                And what else should they fight with gangs, such as those that were recently in Chechnya? This is precisely their duty (former VVs), not the regular troops. The army should fight with an external enemy, and not participate in restoring order within its own country.
                1. -1
                  17 June 2021 17: 22
                  I have already heard this somewhere. That is, you are proposing with the forces and weapons that you have listed, to fight against the enemy armed with "Grads" and tanks?
                  1. -1
                    17 June 2021 18: 07
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    That is, you are proposing with the forces and weapons that you have listed, to fight against the enemy armed with "Grads" and tanks?

                    And where did I suggest this?
                    1. -1
                      17 June 2021 18: 09
                      How! You met as recently as in Chechnya.
                      1. -1
                        17 June 2021 18: 18
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        You met as recently as in Chechnya.

                        No need to compose and attribute your fantasies to me. I wasn't going anywhere.
                        I will repeat it once again, if it didn’t come from the first time:
                        The army must fight with an external enemy, and those who are supposed to be in charge of bringing order inside the country and their weapons must be appropriate to carry out these tasks.
                      2. -3
                        17 June 2021 18: 19
                        Their armament, in the National Guard, should be 152 mm?
                      3. 0
                        17 June 2021 18: 20
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        Should their armament be 152 mm?

                        I have nothing to add to what has been said.
    3. 0
      17 June 2021 09: 59
      do we have problems with the number of roads?
    4. +1
      17 June 2021 12: 27
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      the wheeled SPG does not have a self-entrenching function, which is one of the most important functions for SPGs with light armor and with the development of modern drones

      Any modern ammunition, with a KVO 1m, was put with the device for your self-entrenching. Balloons on the roof, that's all.
      Wheeled self-propelled guns are good for peacetime ... in a real combat situation they are of little use

      Please give an example - any of the modern conflicts over the past 20 years, when a wheeled self-propelled gun did not fulfill its task, due to the lack of tracks.
      Please, at least one. Hmm?
      There are no such examples. But the ACS - there is, with what all over the world, and they are becoming more and more.
      And even Russia, with its mythical mud ridges - and even then, recognized the need for such systems.
      1. -2
        17 June 2021 15: 25
        Quote: psiho117
        Any modern ammunition, with a KVO 1m, was put with the device for your self-entrenching. Balloons on the roof, that's all.

        How does the KVO of the cannon artillery of the Second World War differ from the KVO of modern artillery? In my opinion, absolutely nothing!
        Quote: psiho117
        Please give an example - any of the modern conflicts over the past 20 years, when a wheeled self-propelled gun did not fulfill its task, due to the lack of tracks.
        Please, at least one. Hmm?
        There are no such examples. But the ACS - there is, with what all over the world, and they are becoming more and more.
        And even Russia, with its mythical mud ridges - and even then, recognized the need for such systems.

        Has the Russian army fought on a large scale over the past 20 years? Are there examples? Or do you believe the screeching of pots?
    5. +1
      17 June 2021 14: 59
      Also, a wheeled SPG does not have a self-entrenching function, which is one of the most important functions for SPGs with light armor and with the development of modern drones.

      We take the example of the Armenians, they dug beautiful positions ... even ... like graves laughing
      Mobility is the best defense.
      1. -2
        17 June 2021 15: 27
        Quote: Konnick
        We take the example of the Armenians, they dug beautiful positions ... even ... like graves
        Mobility is the best defense.

        Yeah, let's write down the new Napoleon in tactics: no need to dig in, it's all the 20th century! Anyway, the drone will get it!
        1. -1
          17 June 2021 17: 04
          All the same, the drone will get it!

          And here is a drone, just another counter-battery. With modern devices, determining the location of the battery is a matter of a few minutes. Therefore, there is no point in digging in. A 120mm mine destroys even a dug-in tank when it hits the engine compartment. They shot them in 5 minutes, and get out of the way. And let Kuzma Kuzmich dig trenches, they will be useful in another capacity.
  3. 0
    17 June 2021 08: 44
    And why do we need a "Malva" with manual loading? Have the Ukrainians spied on or such an economy?
    1. +1
      17 June 2021 09: 21
      Loading is not the most difficult ... there are standards for the deployment and folding of the gun ... there the weight is plus or minus 6 tons. Unhook, roll, unfold and then back ...
    2. +6
      17 June 2021 10: 01
      Quote: smaug78
      And why do we need a "Malva" with manual loading?

      The "Malva" has two windows in the breech of the cannon. A projectile is inserted on the left side, a charge on the right. Further, the projectile and the charge are sent by an automatic machine. Everything is like normal foreign ones.
      Charge tab (in the same way, on the other side, they put in a projectile)
      1. 0
        17 June 2021 10: 07
        Archer, for example Dana?
        1. +7
          17 June 2021 10: 23
          Quote: smaug78
          Archer, for example Dana?

          These should be compared with the "Coalition", not with "Malva".
          And "Malva" for example with SAU Next Caesar 155mm (France).

          I would like to draw your attention to the fact that our first eight (?) Shots can be made by dispensing with only two loaders - the ammunition pads of the first stage are located right next to the site where the loader stands (in the photo these are boxes with open doors). To charge the cannon, he needs to take the charge (projectile) from the ammunition rack, turn around and put the charge (projectile) into the window on the breech. You don't even need to go anywhere.
          1. +3
            17 June 2021 11: 01
            thanks for the info good
          2. +2
            17 June 2021 11: 51
            And more than 8 shots in the first stage in modern combat will not be needed. After shooting them, you will need to leave the position.
          3. 0
            17 June 2021 13: 34
            And this is how our "Phlox" (the gun turns along with the ammunition rack)
            1. 0
              18 June 2021 16: 05
              Phlox in the Drok-Phlox-Malva line looks like the most controversial car. It has a wheeled chassis, a short firing range with conventional ammunition and a not too large caliber. A tracked chassis close to the front line seems preferable.
  4. +4
    17 June 2021 09: 18
    It seems to me alone that the chassis was confused with the artillery systems? BAZ is more lifting ...
    1. +3
      17 June 2021 10: 31
      Quote: Zaurbek
      It seems to me alone that the chassis was confused under the artillery systems?

      Here the KAMAZ chassis (Pantsir, Coalition) have already had their bones washed more than once, so there are no comments on this topic.
      1. +1
        17 June 2021 10: 37
        Well, the bare weapon might pull it ... but the tower and the more powerful Kaolitsiya, I'm not sure.
        1. +2
          17 June 2021 13: 24
          Quote: Zaurbek
          .but the tower and the more powerful Kaolitsiya, I'm not sure.

          Could have made the "Coalition" in the layout of the "Shore", only with the BAZ chassis.
          1. 0
            17 June 2021 16: 13
            In fact, it is ... but Kamaz will not pull ...
      2. 0
        19 June 2021 23: 27
        KAMAZ is a proven cheap chassis, spare parts, including 740 engines for it in bulk, and BAZ is a complex piece machine. Maybe he is not needed for the reproductive systems ...
  5. +6
    17 June 2021 09: 31
    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
    Wheeled SPGs are good for peacetime as they are cheaper to operate than tracked SPGs. But in a real combat situation, they are of little use.


    And this is true not only for SPGs.
    All branches of the armed forces have weapons and equipment that are convenient in peacetime and almost useless in wartime.
    1. 0
      17 June 2021 13: 14
      Rather, it depends on the intensity of the hostilities. In local conflicts, on hard surfaces and soils, the use of wheeled vehicles is quite justified.
  6. -3
    17 June 2021 09: 42
    hmm ... here you need to make multiple-shot launchers of loitering ammunition on a wheeled chassis, not howitzers. savages, 21st century in the yard, hello.
    1. +1
      17 June 2021 12: 00
      What is the price of the issue and what are the goals? 152-mm OFS is incomparably cheaper than loitering ammunition. Until the loitering ammunition reaches the enemy, the enemy can already leave the position. The speed of striking the enemy with art is incomparably higher. The drone can be destroyed by air defense and electronic warfare, there is no artillery shell.
      1. -1
        17 June 2021 12: 37
        Quote: Cympak
        The drone can be destroyed by air defense and electronic warfare, there is no artillery shell.

        A shell is possible, but very expensive.
        German MANTIS, for example, or promising 200-300kW lasers. Wangui, in 20-30 years, you will have to add stealth to the shells, and scattering false targets so as not to be shot down wassat
      2. 0
        17 June 2021 22: 09
        naive ... if the enemy is able to defend himself against loitering ammunition, then art is generally not the kind of weapon that can be effectively used against him - no reconnaissance and adjustments ... shoot in that direction and die from modern warfare? no, thanks.
        zs I sincerely do not understand retrogrades looking for cheaper ways to get to heaven.
  7. -4
    17 June 2021 10: 52
    It is strange that it took so long to go to the SG on the KSh, the divisions on the APC with the SAM on the KSh, had to have the SG on the KSh in the SAP, so the mobility and speed of the KSh and the SAP on the tracks were higher than the APCs. So it was logical to ask this question for a long time, especially as local conflicts showed, it is no longer reasonable to dig the SG into the ground and lay ammunition on the ground, after two volleys, the location of the artillery unit is determined, therefore a quick change of the firing position is a guarantee of survival, and the SG on the KSh is better option than tracked SG. One minus of the SG on the KSh is in the protection of the crew and the artillery installation itself.
  8. 0
    17 June 2021 11: 04
    Wheels or caterpillars - that is the question (passion is straight from Shakespeare). Remember on what chassis we have MLRS. And why?
    After a volley, you need to abruptly carry away your legs, this is one, and at a considerable distance, this is two. Soggy soil, woods, waist-deep snow, urban buildings and other difficult-to-pass places are for tanks, because they are advancing in front. The artillery does not need this, it operates from afar, so it can afford to choose the places from where to wage the war. That is why the MLRS is on wheels.
    Modern warfare has accelerated dramatically, including in terms of intelligence. Artillery (cannon) can no longer stand in one place for an hour or more. Most likely, they will cover it in 15 minutes. If it goes on like this, in general, you will have to shoot from short stops in motion, and you need to prepare for this now.
    That is, the modern requirements for barrel artillery have become the same as for MLRS - mobility and large movements. Hence the attempts to change the base. So far clumsy (at least in appearance) attempts, but the direction is clear. We need automatic wheeled howitzers integrated into command and control systems for target designation, movement planning, and combat support.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +2
      17 June 2021 12: 41
      Quote: Conjurer
      Remember on what chassis we have MLRS. And why?

      Because MLRS is much lighter than self-propelled guns.
      The same Tornado-G with a mass of 14 tons carries 40 RSs,
      each of which has factor of large warhead,
      than a 152mm projectile and fires them (all 40) in 20 seconds.
      And the heavy MLRS have a much greater range than the self-propelled guns, and therefore it is much easier for it to reach a position convenient for shelling.

      Wheeled artillery is a peacetime toy.
      1. +3
        17 June 2021 14: 41
        Is towed artillery also a peacetime toy? Maybe you just do not really understand artillery and its use, types and types? As well as the staff structure of divisions and brigades, how they are formed and how they are supplied with fortune and why. Therefore, it is better not to think about what you do not really understand.
        1. +2
          18 June 2021 07: 58
          Quote: Serhi
          Is towed artillery also a peacetime toy? Maybe you just do not really understand artillery and its use, types and types?

          Where did I say that the towed art is a "toy"?
          It was about wheeled self-propelled guns.
          And the towed art is very relevant - you just need to modernize it:
          automate, improve the OMS (up to the installation of a new one), etc.
          The towed art has the flexibility to be deployed: it can be dragged both on tracks and on wheels.

          And repeat the good, and then repeat again:
          wheeled self-propelled guns - a toy for peacetime
  9. +1
    17 June 2021 14: 52
    For especially smart and gifted people who believe that self-propelled howitzers (SG) on a wheeled chassis (KSH) are a "peacetime toy", I ask you to recall the MSD on the armored personnel carrier and what kind of artillery was used in these divisions. Let me remind you that these were towed 122 mm D-30A in SADN, and 152 mm Msta-B or D-20 in SAP. Now, in the era of drones and the development of radars, they have become irrelevant, in view of the long change of positions and the long deployment of the firing position. Therefore, the alternative to transplantation to SG on CABG is obvious. MLRS in this topic do not need to stick their own task on the battlefield.
  10. +7
    17 June 2021 15: 38
    The coalition on the KAMAZ chassis looks really bad
    1. 0
      12 February 2024 12: 34
      The leadership of the RF Ministry of Defense Vasya with KamAZ. And instead of putting the Coalition on a BAZ chassis, they put it on a KamAZ...
  11. +7
    17 June 2021 18: 39
    In parallel with the ACS 2S35, a unified project 2S35-1 was developed on a tracked base. It provided for the installation of a ready-made uninhabited fighting compartment on a four-axle KamAZ-6560 automobile chassis.
    Apparently not enough "Carapaces" turned over on the chassis of a KAMAZ - now they decided to overturn the ACS to "test" the lobbyists suck! sad
  12. +3
    17 June 2021 21: 45
    Wheeled self-propelled guns are good in Europe (there are roads everywhere) or in North Africa (there is a decent zip and it will go everywhere without roads). We must have an ACS either tracked or towed. Another thing is that the towed one can be made more complicated, with an automatic loader, fire controls, automated folding, etc.
  13. -1
    17 June 2021 21: 58
    A howitzer on wheels is definitely not needed, a waste of money, another drank. The permeability is almost zero, what is the point in technology when this technique cannot be at the right point?
  14. +1
    20 June 2021 15: 58
    Quote: axxmanm
    Wheeled artillery is a peacetime toy.

    Well, yes, Americans, Europeans, and our MO - do ** ki completely. You shouldn't have consulted with you.
    Slow, clumsy artillery is just a target even in modern warfare, not like in the future. Do you know how much the gun really weighs and why tracked self-propelled guns are so heavy?
  15. 0
    12 February 2024 12: 33
    The 2S43 Malva self-propelled gun also has a chance of getting into the army. Based on the totality of its combat and other characteristics, it can be considered as a modern and more mobile alternative to the existing 2S5 “Gyacinth-S” vehicle.
    Mallow CANNOT be an alternative to Hyacinth. Her hardware is similar to Msta

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"